DOCSLIB.ORG

Chandler River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chandler River TMDL Summary Appendix 666---111777 Chandler River Watershed Description Waterbody Facts This TMDL applies to a 27.19 mile section of the Chandler River, Segment ID: including its eastern branch, located in the Towns of Duram, ME0106000102_603R02 Pownal and North Yarmouth, Maine. The headwaters of the Town: Duram, Pownal, Chandler River are at the outlet of Runaround Pond in Durham. North Yarmouth, ME The river flows south, crossing Runaround Pond Road, then County: Cumberland through a wooded area before crossing Poland Range Road, Lawrence Road, Elmwood Road, and Chadsey Road, in an area of Impaired Segment mixed forest, agriculture and residential development. The river Length: 27.19 miles continues south, crossing Milliken Road, and meets with the East Classification: Class B Branch before flowing south to its convergence with the Royal River in Gray. The East Branch originates in a wetland complex in Direct Watershed: 51.89 2 Durham. The river flows south through a predominantly forested mi (33,210 acres) area before crossing Quaker Meeting House Road, Brown Road, Impairment Listing Poland Range Road, Tuttle Road and Elmwood Road. The river Cause: Dissolved Oxygen then crosses Hodsdon Road, flows north across Hallowell Road and then south again. Downstream of the West Pownal Road crossing, Watershed Agricultural the East Branch meets the main stem of the Chandler River. Land Use: 14.3% The Chandler River watershed covers an area of 51.89 square Major Drainage Basin: miles. The majority of the watershed is located with0in the Town Presumpscot River of Pownal, however, smaller portions of the watershed lie within the surrounding towns of Auburn, New Gloucester, Durham, Brunswick, Freeport, Gray, and North Yarmouth. Runoff from agricultural land along Tuttle Road is likely the largest source of nonpoint source (NPS) pollution to the Chandler River. Runoff from cultivated lands, active hay lands, and pasture can transport nitrogen and phosphorus to the nearest section of the stream. The Chandler River watershed is predominately non-developed (95.8%). Forested areas (74.1%) within the watershed absorb and filter pollutants helping protect both water quality in the stream and stream channel stability. Wetlands (7%) may also help filter nutrients. Non-forested areas within the watershed are predominantly agricultural (14.3%). Developed areas (4.2%) with impervious surfaces may impact water quality. The Chandler River including its East Branch is on Maine’s 303(d) Watershed Land Uses list of Impaired Streams (Maine DEP, 2013). Definitions Agriculture • Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) represents the total amount Forest of pollutants that a waterbody can receive and still meet water Wetland quality standards. Developed • Nonpoint Source Pollution refers to pollution that comes from many diffuse sources across the landscape, and is typically transported by rain or snowmelt runoff. Maine Statewide TMDL for NPS Pollution June 2016 Figure 1: Land Use in the Chandler River Watershed WHY IS A TMDL ASSESSMENT NEEDED ? The Chandler River including its East Branch, a Class B freshwater stream, has been assessed by Maine DEP as not meeting water quality standards for the designated use of aquatic life, and placed on the 303(d) list of impaired waters under the Clean Water Act. The Clean Water Act requires that all 303(d)-listed waters undergo a TMDL assessment that describes the impairments and establishes a target to guide the measures needed to restore water quality. The goal is for all waterbodies to comply with state water quality standards. Agriculture in the Chandler River watershed makes up about 14% of the total land area, more than three times the area of Chandler River (East Branch) at Tuttle Road. Photo: FB Environmental developed land which accounts for about 4% of total land area (Figure 1). Agriculture is therefore likely to be the largest contributor of sediment and nutrient enrichment to the stream. The close proximity of many agricultural lands to the stream further increases APPENDIX 6-17 2 Maine Statewide TMDL for NPS Pollution June 2016 the likelihood that nutrients from disturbed soils, manure, and fertilizers will reach the stream. Along Tuttle Road, in particular, heavy erosion was documented as a result of livestock in the stream. WATER QUALITY DATA ANALYSIS Maine DEP uses a variety of data types to measure the ability of a stream to adequately support aquatic life, including; dissolved oxygen, benthic macroinvertebrates, and periphyton (algae). The aquatic life impairment in Chandler River is based on historic dissolved oxygen data. TMDL ASSESSMENT APPROACH : NUTRIENT MODELING OF IMPAIRED AND ATTAINMENT STREAMS NPS pollution is difficult to measure directly, because it comes from many diffuse sources spread across the landscape. For this reason, a nutrient loading model, MapShed, was used to estimate the sources of pollution based on well-established hydrological equations; detailed maps of soil, land use, and slope; many years of daily weather data; and direct observations of agriculture and other land uses within the watershed. The nutrient loading estimates for the impaired stream were compared to similar estimates for five non- impaired (attainment) streams of similar watershed land uses across the state. The TMDL for the impaired stream was set as the mean nutrient loading estimate of these attainment stream watersheds, and units of mass per unit watershed area per year (kg/ha/year) were used. The difference in loading estimates between the impaired and attainment watersheds represents the percent reduction in nutrient loading required under this TMDL. The attainment streams and their nutrient and sediment loading estimates and TMDL are presented below in Table 1. Table 1: Numeric Targets for Pollutant Loading Based on MapShed Model Outputs for Attainment Streams TP load TN load Sediment load Attainment Streams Town (kg/ha/yr) (kg/ha/yr) (1000 kg/ha/yr) Martin Stream Fairfield 0.14 3.4 0.008 Footman Brook Exeter 0.33 6.4 0.058 Upper Kenduskeag Stream Corinth 0.29 5.6 0.047 Upper Pleasant River Gray 0.22 4.6 0.016 Moose Brook Houlton 0.25 5.9 0.022 Total Maximum Daily Load 0.24 5.2 0.030 APPENDIX 6-17 3 Maine Statewide TMDL for NPS Pollution June 2016 RAPID WATERSHED ASSESSMENT Habitat Assessment A Habitat Assessment survey was conducted on both the impaired and attainment streams. The assessment approach is based on the Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Wadeable Streams and Rivers (Barbour et al., 1999), which integrates various parameters relating to the structure of physical habitat. The habitat assessments include a general description of the site and physical characterization and visual assessment of in-stream and riparian habitat quality. Based on Rapid Bioassessment protocols for low gradient streams, the Chandler River received a score of 171 out of a total 200 for quality of habitat. Higher scores indicate better habitat. The range of habitat assessment scores for attainment streams was 155 to 179. RAPID HABITAT ASESSMENT SCORES The habitat assessment was conducted on a for Attainment and Impaired Streams relatively short sample reach (about 100-200 meters 200 for a typical small stream), and was located near the most downstream Maine DEP sample station. For 190 both impaired and attainment streams, the assessment location was usually near a road 180 crossing for ease of access. In the Chandler River watershed, the downstream sample station was 170 located in a forested portion of the stream with a thick buffer. Although there is some agriculture 160 Attainment within the Chandler River watershed, a majority of Impaired the stream flows within forested areas. 150 Figure 2 (right) shows the range of habitat Habitat Score Chandler 140 assessment scores for all attainment and impaired River streams, as well as for the Chandler River. The overlapping attainment and impaired stream scores 130 indicate that factors other than habitat should be considered when addressing the impairments in the 120 Chandler River. Consideration should be given to major “hot spots” in the Chandler River watershed 110 as potential sources of NPS pollution contributing to the water quality impairment. 100 Figure 2: Habitat Assessment Scores Pollution Source Identification Pollution source identification assessments were conducted for both Chandler River (impaired) and the attainment streams. The source identification component of this study is based on an abbreviated version of the Center for Watershed Protection’s Unified Subwatershed and Site Reconnaissance method (Wright, et al., 2005). The abbreviated method includes both a desktop and field component. The desktop assessment consists of generating and reviewing maps of the watershed boundary, roads, land use and satellite imagery, and then identifying potential NPS pollution locations, such as road crossings, agricultural fields, and large areas of bare soil. When available, multiple sources of satellite imagery APPENDIX 6-17 4 Maine Statewide TMDL for NPS Pollution June 2016 were reviewed. Occasionally, the high resolution of the imagery allowed for observations of livestock, row crops, eroding stream banks, sediment laden water, junkyards, and other potential NPS concerns that could affect stream quality. As many potential pollution sources as possible were visited, assessed and documented in the field. Field visits were limited to NPS sites that were visible from roads or a short walk from a roadway. Neighborhoods were assessed for NPS pollution at the whole neighborhood level including streets and storm drains (where applicable). The assessment does not include a scoring component, but does include a detailed summary of findings and a map indicating documented NPS sites throughout the watershed. The watershed source assessment for the Chandler River was completed on July 6, 2012. In-field observations of erosion, lack of vegetated stream buffer, extensive impervious surfaces, high-density neighborhoods and agricultural activities were documented throughout the watershed (Table 1, Figure 3). Table 2: Pollution Source ID Assessment for the Chandler River Watershed Potential Source ID# Location Type Notes Road • Moderate erosion observed at road crossing.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo Salar)
    Final Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) November, 2005 Prepared by NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Silver Spring, Maryland and Northeastern Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hadley, Massachusetts Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine Distinct Population Segment of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) November, 2005 Prepared by NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Silver Spring, Maryland and Northeastern Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hadley, Massachusetts Approved: Assistant Administrator for Fisheries Date NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date DISCLAIMER Recovery plans delineate actions that are thought to be necessary to recover andlor protect endangered species. Recovery plans are prepared by NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, state agencies and others. This Recovery Plan for the Gulf of Maine (GOM) Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) was prepared by the staff of the Northeast Regional Offices of NMFS with the assistance of the FWS and the Maine Atlantic Salmon Commission (ASC). While the State of Maine provided recommendations for this plan, it was developed using federal guidelines and policies pertaining to recovery plans for federally listed species. Recovery plans are not regulatory or decision documents. The recommendations in a recovery plan are not considered final decisions unless and until they are actually proposed for implementation. Objectives will only be attained and hnds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities and other budgetary constraints.
    [Show full text]
  • Mainedot Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021 Maine Department of Transportation
    Maine State Library Digital Maine Transportation Documents Transportation 2-2019 MaineDOT Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021 Maine Department of Transportation Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalmaine.com/mdot_docs Recommended Citation Maine Department of Transportation, "MaineDOT Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021" (2019). Transportation Documents. 124. https://digitalmaine.com/mdot_docs/124 This Text is brought to you for free and open access by the Transportation at Digital Maine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Transportation Documents by an authorized administrator of Digital Maine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MaineDOT Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021 February 2019 February 21, 2019 MaineDOT Customers and Partners: On behalf of the 2,000 valued employees of the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT), I am privileged to present this 2019 Edition of our Work Plan for the three Calendar Years 2019, 2020 and 2021. Implementation of this plan allows us to achieve our mission of responsibly providing our customers with the safest and most reliable transportation system possible, given available resources. Like all recent editions, this Work Plan includes all capital projects and programs, maintenance and operations activities, planning initiatives, and administrative functions. This plan contains 2,193 individual work items with a total value of $2.44 billion, consisting principally of work to be delivered or coordinated through MaineDOT, but also including funding and work delivered by other transportation agencies that receive federal funds directly including airports and transit agencies. Although I have the pleasure of presenting this plan, it is really the product of staff efforts dating back to the summer of last year.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishery Bulletin of the Fish and Wildlife Service V.53
    'I', . FISRES OF '!'RE GULF OF MAINE. 101 Description.-The hickory shad differs rather Bay, though it is found in practically all of them. noticeably from the sea herring in that the point This opens the interesting possibility that the of origin of its dorsal fin is considerably in front of "green" fish found in Chesapeake Bay, leave the the mid-length of its trunk; in its deep belly (a Bay, perhaps to spawn in salt water.65 hickory shad 13~ in. long is about 4 in. deep but a General range.-Atlantic coast of North America herring of that length is only 3 in. deep) ; in the fact from the Bay of Fundy to Florida. that its outline tapers toward both snout and tail Occurrence in the Gulf oj Maine.-The hickory in side view (fig. 15); and in that its lower jaw shad is a southern fish, with the Gulf of Maine as projects farther beyond the upper when its mouth the extreme northern limit to its range. It is is closed; also, by the saw-toothed edge of its belly. recorded in scientific literature only at North Also, it lacks the cluster of teeth on the roof of the· Truro; at Provincetown; at Brewster; in Boston mouth that is characteristic of the herring. One Harbor; off Portland; in Casco Ba3T; and from the is more likely to confuse a hickory shad with a shad mouth of the Bay of Fundy (Huntsman doubts or with the alewives, which it resembles in the this record), and it usually is so uncommon within position of its dorsal fin, in the great depth of its our limits that we have seen none in the Gulf body, in its saw-toothed belly and in the lack of ourselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes of Maine
    " " h t. FISHES OF MAINE W. Harry Everhart Former Chief of Fisheries Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife - k Published by The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Maynard F. Marsh, Commissioner Augusta, Maine 1st Edition 1950 2d Edition 1958 2d Printing 1961 3d Edition 1966 4th Edition 1976 Published under Appropriation 4550 FOREWORD The Fishes of Maine is presented by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife as a guide to fishermen in identifying the fish they catch and observe in our inland waters. The descriptions and life histories will perhaps add to the interest and enjoyment of the obser­ vations that fishermen make as they seek the many game fishes that live in the lakes and streams. Scientific study and management of Maine's inland fisheries have progressed rapidly since 1950 (date of publication of the 1st Edition of the Fishes of Maine) under the administrations of Commissioners Roland H. Cobb. Ronald T. Speers, George Buckman and Maynard F. Marsh. The combination of good men and proper working environment has resulted in many studies yielding more and more information about Maine fishes. Each fishery biologist, as he plans and conducts his research proj­ ects, usually concentrates more on the study of a single species. This concentration makes possible a more intimate understanding of the life histories of our important game fishes. Several of the biologists have helped in the preparation of this book, and their names appear with the life histories they prepared. All color photographs were made of live fish in an aquarium by Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • A STORY of the WASHINGTON COUNTY UNORGANIZED TERRITORIES Prepared by John Dudley for Washington County Council of Governments March 2017
    A STORY OF THE WASHINGTON COUNTY UNORGANIZED TERRITORIES Prepared by John Dudley for Washington County Council of Governments March 2017 The story of the past of any place or people is a history, but this story is so brief and incomplete, I gave the title of “A Story”. Another person could have written quite a different story based on other facts. This story is based on facts collected from various sources and arranged in three ways. Scattered through one will find pictures, mostly old and mostly found in the Alexander- Crawford Historical Society files or with my families’ files. Following this introduction is a series on pictures taken by my great-grandfather, John McAdam Murchie. Next we have a text describing the past by subject. Those subjects are listed at the beginning of that section. The third section is a story told by place. The story of each of the places (32 townships, 3 plantations and a couple of organized towns) is told briefly, but separately. These stories are mostly in phrases and in chronological order. The listed landowners are very incomplete and meant only to give names to the larger picture of ownership from 1783. Maps supplement the stories. This paper is a work in progress and likely never will be complete. I have learned much through the research and writing of this story. I know that some errors must have found their way onto these pages and they are my errors. I know that this story is very incomplete. I hope correction and additions will be made. This is not my story, it is our story and I have made my words available now so they may be used in the Prospective Planning process.
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Restoration in Maine, 1949
    Salmon Restoration in Maine — BY - GEORGE A. ROUNSEFELL CH IEF, ATLANTIC SALMON INVESTIGATIONS, U. S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE — AND — LYNDON H. BOND ASSISTANT INVESTIGATOR, REPRESENTING ATLANTIC SEA-RUN SALMON COMMISSION Research Report No. 1 ATLANTIC SEA-RUN SALMON COMMISSION of the State of Maine AUGUSTA 1949 ATLANTIC SEA-RUN SALMON COMMISSION Richard E. Reed, Chairman Commissioner, Department of Sea and Shore Fisheries Horace P. Bond, Secretary George J. Stobie Commissioner, Department of Inland Fisheries and Game SALMON RESEARCH COMMITTEE George A. Rounsefell, Chief, Atlantic Salmon Investigations, Fish and Wildlife Service, U. S. Department of the Interior Lyndon H. Bond, Fishery Biologist Department of Inland Fisheries and Game Clyde C. Taylor, Chief Biologist Department of Sea and Shore Fisheries RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Participating Organizations: Atlantic Sea-Run Salmon Commission Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Dept, of the Interior Department of Inland Fisheries and Game Department of Sea and Shore Fisheries University of Maine Coordinator and Chief Biologist: George A. Rounsefell Fishery Biologist* Lyndon H. Bond Headquarters: University of Maine, Orono Field Station: Moosehom National Wildlife Refuge, Edmunds Fish Cultural Stations: U. S. Fishery Station, Craig Brook, East Orland Inland Fisheries Station: Tunk Lake, Cheiryfield Collaborators and Advisors: Limnology: W. Harry Everhart, University of Maine Engineering: Carl H. Crane, Inland Fisheries and Game Fish Culture: George K. White, Fish and Wildlife Service Experimental Stream: Bertrand E. Smith, Fish and Wild­ life Service Pollution: (Vacancy) Statistics. Louis R. Cates, Sea and Shore Fisheries Fisheries: Clyde C. Taylor and Frederick T. Baird, Jr. Sea and Shore Fisheries Stanley P. Linscott and Robert E.
    [Show full text]
  • Atlantic Salmon EFH the Proposed EFH Designation for Atlantic Salmon
    Atlantic salmon EFH The proposed EFH designation for Atlantic salmon includes the rivers, estuaries, and bays that are listed in Table 31 and shown in Map 105, which exhibit the environmental conditions defined in the text descriptions. Smaller tributaries not shown on the map are also EFH for one or more life stage as long as they conform to the proposed habitat descriptions. All EFH river systems form a direct connection to the sea, but EFH would not include portions of rivers above naturally occurring barriers to upstream migration or land-locked lakes and ponds. The oceanic component of EFH is to a distance of three miles from the mouth of each river. The new designation includes six new drainage systems not included in the original list of 26 rivers that were designated in 1998. All of them are in the Maine coastal sub-region (Chandler, Indian, Pleasant, St. George, Medomak, and Pemaquid rivers). All told, 30 river systems in nine New England sub-regions are designated for Atlantic salmon EFH. The new map includes a more continuous series of bays and areas adjacent to river mouths that are within three miles of the coast. Designated EFH in Long Island Sound has been reduced to small areas where the Connecticut and Pawcatuck Rivers empty into the sound, rather than taking up the entire sound. Also, there are a number of improvements in the text descriptions which make the habitat requirements for each life stage more specific and applicable to three separate juvenile life stages (fry, parr, and smolts). Text descriptions: Essential fish habitat for Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) is designated as the rivers, estuaries, and bays that are listed in Table 31 and shown in Map 105.
    [Show full text]
  • Salmo Salar) in the United States
    Status Review for Anadromous Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) in the United States Atlantic Salmon Biological Review Team Clem Fay, Penobscot Nation, Department of Natural Resources Meredith Bartron, USFWS, Northeast Fishery Center Scott Craig, USFWS, Maine Fisheries Resource Office Anne Hecht, USFWS, Ecological Services Jessica Pruden, NMFS, Northeast Region Rory Saunders (Chair), NMFS, Northeast Region Tim Sheehan, NMFS, Northeast Fisheries Science Center Joan Trial, Maine Atlantic Salmon Commission July 2006 Acknowledgements Clem Fay was a key member of the Atlantic Salmon Biological Review Team (BRT) until he passed away in October of 2005. His understanding of ecological processes was unrivaled, and his contributions to this document were tremendous. Since his passing preceded the publication of this Status Review, he was not able to see the completion of this project. We would also like to acknowledge Jerry Marancik’s early contributions to this project. He was a BRT member until he retired in the spring of 2004. At that time, Scott Craig assumed Jerry Marancik’s role on the BRT. We would also like to acknowledge the many people who contributed to the completion of this document. Primarily, the work of previous Atlantic Salmon BRTs helped form the basis of this document. Previous BRT members include M. Colligan, J. Kocik, D. Kimball, J. Marancik, J. McKeon, P. Nickerson, and D. Beach. Many other individuals contributed helpful comments, ideas, and work products including D. Belden, E. Cushing, R. Dill, N. Dube, M. Hachey, C. Holbrook, D. Kusnierz, P. Kusnierz, C. Legault, G. Mackey, S. MacLean, L. Miller, M. Minton, K. Mueller, J. Murphy, S.
    [Show full text]
  • Bikemaine 2016
    2016 FINISHMachias Discover the Bold Coast! LUNCH Machiasport Fire Station DAY 2 Sept. 12 54 miles 2,852 ft elevation gain start Jonesport REST rest stop #1 (12.5 mi) STOP #1 Jonesport Town Park Jonesport Town Park lunch stop (39.5 mi) Machiasport START Fire Station & Jonesport Town Complex finish Machias route SAG Support 207-200-7845 color YELLOW CUE SHEET Day 2 | Sept. 12 | 54 miles | 2,852 ft elevation gain Leg Total Directions Leg Total Directions 0 Depart BikeMaine Village on Albert Kelley Road 0 30.3 Make U-turn at boat launch 1.3 0.1 Turn left onto Kelley Point Road 1.8 30.3 Exit park on Schoppee Point Rd./Becomes Roque Bluffs Rd. 1.5 1.4 Turn left onto ME-187 3.5 32.1 Stay straight onto Roque Bluffs Rd. 0.5 2.9 Turn left onto Bridge St.; cross bridge to Beals Island 0.1 35.6 Turn right onto West Kennebec Rd. 1.2 3.4 Immediately after bridge turn left onto Barney's Cove Rd./Bayview Drive 0.9 35.7 Turn left onto Cross Rd. 0 4.6 Continue onto Bay View Dr.; cross bridge onto Great Wass Island 2.4 36.6 Turn right onto East Kennebec Rd. 0.9 4.6 Turn left onto Alleys Bay Rd. 0.5 39 Turn right onto Port Rd./Rte 92 0.1 5.5 Make U turn at Town Landing 0 39.5 Turn right into Machiasport Fire Station/Town Complex - Lunch Stop 0.9 5.6 Turn right onto Alleys Bay Rd.
    [Show full text]
  • Maine State Legislature
    MAINE STATE LEGISLATURE The following document is provided by the LAW AND LEGISLATIVE DIGITAL LIBRARY at the Maine State Law and Legislative Reference Library http://legislature.maine.gov/lawlib Reproduced from electronic originals (may include minor formatting differences from printed original) * ~·:· MaineDOT Three-Year ork Plan 2020 Edition January 14, 2020 January 14, 2020 MaineDOT Customers and Partners: On behalf of the 1,800 dedicated and valued employees at the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT), I am privileged to present this 2020 Edition of our Work Plan for the three calendar years 2020, 2021, and 2022. This Work Plan includes all capital projects and programs, maintenance and operations activities, planning initiatives, and administrative functions. This plan contains 2,051 individual work items with a total value of $2.59 billion, consisting principally of work to be delivered or coordinated through MaineDOT, but also including funding and work by other transportation agencies including airports and transit agencies. This plan is the primary way that MaineDOT achieves its mission of responsibly providing our customers with the safest and most reliable transportation system possible, given available resources. Preparing the MaineDOT Work Plan takes many months. An early step is to adjust projects that had appeared in prior work plans, including changes to cost, schedule, scope, or available funding. In a typical year, we make the “old” projects whole and then add new capital projects worth hundreds of millions of dollars (principally in the third year of the plan). This year is not typical. Due to cost increases arising from workforce challenges, work constraints, and other factors, making the old projects whole has required an extraordinary amount of funding.
    [Show full text]
  • Down East Sunrise Trail (DEST) Cable Pool, CherryEld
    Maine Department of Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry - Bureau of Parks and Lands POINTS OF INTEREST Online maps and brochures are available for many of the DEST Trail Guide points of interest. A little research ahead of time will add to Overview, highlights, your DEST experience. DEST Section Map www.sunrisetrail.org and three section maps. Acadia National Park............................................. Map 1 www.nps.gov/acadia Bad Little Falls, 1 Elm St., Machias.................... Map 3 RESOURCES Washington Junction to Ayers Junction = 85 miles Blackwoods Scenic Byway ................................. Map 1 Schoodic Mountain 85 miles and growing, the Down East Sunrise Trail (DEST) www.exploremaine.org Cable Pool, Cherryeld......................................... Map 1 ATV / ORV information is a year-round multi-use rail trail, and the longest o-road Maine Bureau of Parks and Lands section of the East Coast Greenway. Cobscook Bay State Park..................................... Map 3 www.maine.gov/cobscookbay ATV program/ORV oce (207) 287-4958 Cutler Coast Public Lands.................................... Map 3 Statewide trail map available This Guide provides a trail overview, highlights www.parksandlands.com and near-trail amenities, and three section maps: Donnell Pond Public Reserve Lands................ Map 1 1. Washington Junction to Cherryeld (28 miles) Downeast Fisheries Trail....................................... Map 1-3 ATV Maine: www.atvmaine.org 2. Cherryeld to Machias (29 miles) www.DowneastFisheriesTrail.org - online map 3. Machias to Ayers Junction (28 miles) DownEast Gardens and Scenic Vistas............. Map 1-3 Registration: www.maine.gov/ifw www.visitmaine.com - request map Down East Sunrise Trail online maps Trail Surface is an old rail bed packed with gravel. Down East Heritage Rail......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Inland Water Quality Inidicator 13: Inland Water Purpose High Quality Water and C Having a Lower Level of the Streams That Were Added Are Small Urban Streams
    Do the Rivers, Streams and Estuaries in the Casco Bay Watershed Meet State Water Quality Standards? Answer: Overall, yes, waters in the Casco Bay watershed meet State water quality standards. There are some areas that do not meet State water quality standards. Which Waters Do Not Meet Water Quality Standards? The table on page 42 lists the waters in the Casco Bay watershed that do not meet water quality stan- dards and are required to have an improvement plan produced (known as a Total Maximum Daily Load or TMDL) by the Maine DEP. The Presumpscot River and Highland Lake (Duck Pond) in Windham, Falmouth and Westbrook also do not reach water quality standards but have completed TMDL plans. The New Meadows Lake and the Upper New Mead- ows estuary do not meet water quality standards. Studies are being conducted with the coordination of the CBEP to determine if the source of the prob- Why Are State Water Quality Standards lem is from flow restrictions or nonpoint pollution Important? sources. The map on the opposite page illustrates the waters that do not meet state standards, including ater quality standards help the State man- the Presumpscot, Highland Lake (Duck Pond) and the age its waters. The State of Maine enacted New Meadows. Wlaws to comply with the Federal Clean Water Act of 1972 to manage its waters for specified “designated uses” such as swimming, fishing, boating, What Are the Trends? habitat for aquatic life, drinking water supply, naviga- Overall the water quality in the watershed is good and tion, agriculture, hydropower, industrial process and has remained so over time.
    [Show full text]